The Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference that took place for the first time in five years at United Nations headquarters in New York came to a close with no results. Participants were unable to agree on an action plan on nuclear arms reduction, non-proliferation, and the peaceful use of nuclear power, and they were even unable to issue a chairman's statement on the principles of non-proliferation. All the 188 member nations did during four weeks was note their differences.
The major obstacle to progress in the discussion was the attitude of nuclear states, particularly the US. The US opposed including in the final document things that had already been adopted at previous meetings. The Bush Administration's development of new nuclear weapons and its strategy of nuclear pre-emptive attack also go against previous commitments. Other members states strongly opposed the US demand that the focus be on Iran and North Korea.
The US is even looking as if it wants to render the NPT regime powerless. Examples would be how it is placing more emphasis on its Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) and trying to focus discussion about non-proliferation on the Nuclear Suppliers Group. The fact that the US did not send state secretary Condoleezza Rice to the meeting is being seen as evidence that it does not put any weight in the NPT regime.
The NPT is a treaty that seeks to prohibit the proliferation of nuclear arms and ultimately ban abolish them completely while still recognizing the existing privileges of nuclear states. As such is it hard to maintain without good-faith effort to reduce nuclear arms. Getting rid of that treaty and making another would not only be more difficult, it would not be desirable. The feeling one gets is that it is at a crossroads, and without any alternatives available, after having been a pillar restraining proliferation over the past 35 years.
The Hankyoreh, 30 May 2005.
[Translations by Seoul Selection (PMS)]
[Editorial] NPT in Crisis |
